No, for the many reasons listed above and mainly that you don't want to deter people from seeking medical help based purely on financial circumstances. Also to be honest I feel like if people could pay for appointments it could also work the other way in that once people have paid a certain group of individuals feel like they've got certain rights or privileges from the money, and that's kind of where the US health system is at with people feeling like they for instance deserve antibiotics having paid etc.

GP time is best made free via a triage system, so the minor ailments can either get advice over the phone about self-caring from a triage nurse or see nurse practitioners if they really want to be seen. Also I do wonder sometimes if a bit of health education at school about what symptoms would be consistent with very common simple things e.g. common colds, sore throats, coughs and the kinds of time frame you should leave or the 'red flag' symptoms you should have before you come and see your doctor.

In a messed up way the difficulty of getting GP appointments actually stops a lot of the sore throat type/minor issues people from attending because they resolve long before an appointment has been organised.

And of course actually having an appropriate number of GPs would be a start!! One of the reasons GP appointments are so scarce is because they're retiring in droves and there is insufficient recruitment to meet need. Nobody would be talking about payments and all this jazz if the service were actually adequate (or near enough).

(Original post by Corbynista)
I am a member of labour not the SNP but the facts are this if Scotland went independent it would get is real geographical share of the North Sea oil and gas revenue.

The other fact is that North Sea oil tax revenue is currently about £35 million per annum. If all that went to Scotland it would be about £7 for each man, woman and child, almost enough to to buy them a half bottle of Scotch each.

(Original post by seaholme)
Also I do wonder sometimes if a bit of health education at school about what symptoms would be consistent with very common simple things e.g. common colds, sore throats, coughs and the kinds of time frame you should leave or the 'red flag' symptoms you should have before you come and see your doctor.

I agree. A relative has this habit of taking her child to A&E when she can't get an answer from her GP and then whinges when they're having to wait. I'm sorry; but there are people turning up to A&E with broken bones, head injuries and other serious medical problems.

I kind of had this conversation yesterday - I managed to fall and hit my head and ended up with a lump. Within a 20 minute walk, there's a walk in centre for more minor medical problems. I went there, knowing it was unlikely to be anything serious. (having been able to get up and walk off) Whilst I was being seen, I did say I wan't too sure what to do and was told by the man seeing me, it's what he would have done.

I don't think people are also aware that they can go to the chemist for advice. I've done this when I need some advice which doesn't require being seen by a GP and I just need some over the counter medication or something.

(Original post by joe cooley)
So, the only people you would charge for a GP appointment are the people already paying NI ?

Charge them twice in fact.

Nice one.

A few years ago I'd have agreed with you & ideologically I understand where you're coming from.

However, I'm pragmatic enough to believe that charging those who are JSA, which is about £57-£73 per week, isn't a sterling idea. Those who are disabled would also be exempt as many of those have injuries/conditions that were no fault of their own.

(Original post by Tempest II)
A few years ago I'd have agreed with you & ideologically I understand where you're coming from.

However, I'm pragmatic enough to believe that charging those who are JSA, which is about £57-£73 per week, isn't a sterling idea. Those who are disabled would also be exempt as many of those have injuries/conditions that were no fault of their own.

None of which justifies charging those that work twice and making them pay for those that don't work into the bargain!

Those unable to work due to mental or physical needs should be provided for at the taxpayers expense.

Any able bodied adult capable of work should be expected to contribute.

As long as the NHS is free to those that do not contribute it will always be abused.

Yes JSA is a pittance, and thats why most people work for a living instead of living off handouts.

GP time is best made free via a triage system, so the minor ailments can either get advice over the phone about self-caring from a triage nurse or see nurse practitioners if they really want to be seen. Also I do wonder sometimes if a bit of health education at school about what symptoms would be consistent with very common simple things e.g. common colds, sore throats, coughs and the kinds of time frame you should leave or the 'red flag' symptoms you should have before you come and see your doctor.

Not so sure about this one. A lot of serious illnesses can cause flu like symptoms. Waiting for an extended period of time could just worsen the condition, especially with small children.

A flat charge regardless of circumstances is a terrible idea and will never happen. However I would be in favour of charging people in the same way that you are charged for prescriptions. So children, students, the elderly, the disabled, those on benefits or with long term conditions don't pay, but everyone else does.

However i'm not sure how much revenue that would even raise - most people who can afford to pay will have a private healthcare scheme through their job anyway. If something was wrong with me i'd always see the on site doctor rather than a GP.

(Original post by sr90)
A flat charge regardless of circumstances is a terrible idea and will never happen. However I would be in favour of charging people in the same way that you are charged for prescriptions. So children, students, the elderly, the disabled, those on benefits or with long term conditions don't pay, but everyone else does.

However i'm not sure how much revenue that would even raise - most people who can afford to pay will have a private healthcare scheme through their job anyway. If something was wrong with me i'd always see the on site doctor rather than a GP.

(Original post by sr90)
A flat charge regardless of circumstances is a terrible idea

Why?

The French do it. A proportion of that cost is then repaid by the government.

However i'm not sure how much revenue that would even raise - most people who can afford to pay will have a private healthcare scheme through their job anyway. If something was wrong with me i'd always see the on site doctor rather than a GP.

I think you need to get out more. About 11% of people in the Uk have private health insurance, but the proportion with access to a workplace doctor on call will be tiny.

I am a student currently undertaking a project as part of my Extended Project (EPQ) and wondered if you could answer my question about paying for the GP.

Many Thanks

Yes we should - a proportion to how your income is. I also think we should pay if we miss outpatient appointments. Also if you do not speak english it should be incumbent on you to either learn or bring someone with you.

If you won't look after your health, I think we should be denying people treatment until they address it. Also if you are on more than say 5 medications you should not be given any more unless you have a actual serious health problem,.

(Original post by squeakysquirrel)
Yes we should - a proportion to how your income is.

Which means you're going to penalise people like my mum who has medical problems which aren't her fault. Unknown to her, she's also passed a condition on to two of her children which will require life time check ups and medication as well.

I assume you lot are completely healthy and are lucky enough that you don't need constant medical appointments?

(Original post by Tiger Rag)
Which means you're going to penalise people like my mum who has medical problems which aren't her fault. Unknown to her, she's also passed a condition on to two of her children which will require life time check ups and medication as well.

I assume you lot are completely healthy and are lucky enough that you don't need constant medical appointments?

As you see I said a proportion of how your income is.

We are so lucky with the NHS and it is abused constantly by spongers and hypochondriacs. I am NOT saying that you mum is that - obviously there would have to be exceptions.

I don't think anyone should dignify the spittle-flecked ultra-nationalist website you posted first with a response. As for the New Statesman, it's simply wrong. For a time, Scotland had a higher per capita tax-take than the UK average (the opposite is true now) - however it has also been considerably overfunded in public spending since at least the 19th century.

It is telling that the NS article had to start talking about underfunding in defence and foreign affairs. In reality, this sort of thing ignores that much of our defence expenditure is not at all geographically identifiable within the UK - and that every penny of benefit supports all parts of the UK. What is the case, however, is that Scotland has a £15 billion deficit - higher than anywhere else in Europe as a proportion of GDP - and £10 billion of that is the direct result of fiscal sharing across the UK. There's only been one occasion in the last 26 years - only one year - where Scotland was not in deficit and could be said to be actively contributing to the rest of the UK.

So back to the impact on the NHS. The NHS in Scotland has always been far better funded per head. In part at least, this is justifiable by the geographic and demographic situation Scotland faces - but make no mistake, these additional sums are drawn from the rest of the UK. Prescription charging however is not a considerable area of that expenditure: it only cost around £60 million to introduce free prescriptions in Scotland.

(Original post by Corbynista)
I am a member of labour not the SNP but the facts are this if Scotland went independent it would get is real geographical share of the North Sea oil and gas revenue. By real I mean what we would of got before War Criminal Tony Blair moved the border.

I hope you realise first off that Craig Murray is mentally ill and was refused permission to stand for the SNP. Whether you adjust the border or not makes virtually no difference to North Sea revenues - Scotland already gets apportioned about 9/10ths of all UK offshore oil and gas revenues anyway.

To say the border was moved is incorrect. There was an extant boundary for legal jurisdiction designated in the 1960s. At the advent of devolution, a new boundary for maritime regulation was put in place - with the full agreement, notably, of the Scottish Parliament.

No, paying for GP appointments is one of the last measures I'd introduce. It would simply increase pressure on A&E departments as more people attended with minor complaints.

Also, in my experience, if I've ever had to go to my GP with any sort of regularity, the reason has been their inability to diagnose me at the first visit. That's hardly my responsibility, and frankly it's irritating enough having to move work commitments around and so forth.